Ghost in the Machine brought up a good point in the
last round of reviews, and I'd like to open it up for
general input.
Ghost's arguement concerned Ra's internal monologue where he considers his growing influence over those to whom he's sold information, in particular he mentions knowledge of their insider trading in re the execs targeted by scarecrow.
Well, let's think about this - And let me say the reason I honestly LOVE reviews like this is because it does force me to think a plot point through -
Ra's doesn't have to secure a criminal conviction or anything, just threaten to stir up a world of trouble for these guys, which he can certainly do. They didn't act on some drinking buddy's idle speculation that he thought the stock would go down, they purchased information from an eerily well-informed source that certain individuals were going to go missing. IF this was the only information Ra's had sold them (and there's no reason to think it was), it would still be enough to get questions asked that it would be very awkward for these guys to have to answer. If any of the investigation went public, their reputations are ruined regardless of whether or not they faced criminal proceedings.
BUT when I bounced this off a regular reader the other day they thought Ra's would only be interested in the blackmail threat as a last-resort anyway. If he's selling them information anyway, he would be more likely to use that to influence them without their knowing than to tell them outright "do this or else"
I like this idea tremendously. Would like to open it up for general discussion on strengths & weaknesses in either plan.
Ghost's arguement concerned Ra's internal monologue where he considers his growing influence over those to whom he's sold information, in particular he mentions knowledge of their insider trading in re the execs targeted by scarecrow.
Quote:
I'm not sure if the classic definition of insider trading applies here. Yes, there was advance information not known to the public. But since the source of the information wasn't an insider, or even a stockholder, does it really apply? If I say I think a stock is going to tank and people heed my advice, for whatever reason, that does not make it insider trading.
The control Ra's thinks he has might not be there when he tries to use it.
Well, let's think about this - And let me say the reason I honestly LOVE reviews like this is because it does force me to think a plot point through -
Ra's doesn't have to secure a criminal conviction or anything, just threaten to stir up a world of trouble for these guys, which he can certainly do. They didn't act on some drinking buddy's idle speculation that he thought the stock would go down, they purchased information from an eerily well-informed source that certain individuals were going to go missing. IF this was the only information Ra's had sold them (and there's no reason to think it was), it would still be enough to get questions asked that it would be very awkward for these guys to have to answer. If any of the investigation went public, their reputations are ruined regardless of whether or not they faced criminal proceedings.
BUT when I bounced this off a regular reader the other day they thought Ra's would only be interested in the blackmail threat as a last-resort anyway. If he's selling them information anyway, he would be more likely to use that to influence them without their knowing than to tell them outright "do this or else"
I like this idea tremendously. Would like to open it up for general discussion on strengths & weaknesses in either plan.
